Talk:Endgame (episode)
Episode talk page Maintenance links __TOC__ Quoted form page: "Chakotay and Seven would get married but that Chakotay would die 3 years from then leaving Seven, now reequipped with emotions, unable to deal with the trauma. She along with 18 other crew members will die in the continuing voyage home." I just saw the episode and I've put down the dialogue between Admiral Janeway and Captain Janeway: Admiral: "Seven of Nine is going to die." Captain: "What?" A: "Three years from now. She'll be injured on an away mission. She'll make it back to Voyager and die in the arms of her husband." C: "Husband!?" A: "Chakotay. He'll never be the same after Seven's death." Based on this I'll modify the quote. :"He'll never be the same after Seven's death -- and neither will you." Destruction of the transwarp hub Quoted from page: "As her physical body falls apart and she lies dying on the floor of the Unimatrix, she issues a self-destruct order and the entire transwarp hub complex explodes." I'm very sure the Enterprise fired three torpedos at one of the circles inside the transwarp tunnel, destroying it and creating a chain effect that ends in blowing up the transhub hub. It's never mentioned in the movie that the hub was willingly destroyed by the Queen. Why should the dying Queen give a self destruct issue for the hub? I think this part of the text has to be changed. :Agreed, I'll get to it. And it's Voyager, conduit, and episode. - AJ Halliwell 03:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC) Why isn't this two parts? I'm getting ready to watch this now and it is definitely two parts. I seem to recall watching it in two parts during original airing as well. Slamlander 17:11, 10 Oct 2005 (UTC) :IT was originally aired as a one-part telefilm, i believe. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 17:21, 10 Oct 2005 (UTC) ::* Never mind, you are correct. Slamlander 17:29, 10 Oct 2005 (UTC) Motive is wrong I just finished watching this. There are two points: :# The box for the tape advertises two parts. The contents of the tape is one large telefilm. :# The motive for using the virus is different than that posted in the article, as is the nature of the dilema. I will make the minimal corrections required. `Slamlander #On MA, all episodes that were originally double length telefilms then later broken up into two part episodes for tapes and reshowings can be noted as such -- but our article is formatted for the original form of the episode -- before it was broken up. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 22:36, 10 Oct 2005 (UTC) :*Thanks, I will add that to the part I am editing. I take it that it goes under "Background"? Cannons go "BOOM"! 12:20, 11 Oct 2005 (UTC) Minor rework turned into major effort (gah) I certainly didn't intend to do this much work to it but it's done. There are some spelling errors and I am certain that I over-used commas, as usual. I did uncover some stuff about the Borg. I am taking it under advisement as to whether I want to work that much harder. I have a book to finish. Cannons go "BOOM"! 20:27, 11 Oct 2005 (UTC) Dr. Pulaski? ALIVE? As Janeway leaves Tuvoc when she visits, you can hear a PA in the background. I could have sworn they called for Dr. Pulaski. Can anyone confirm this? *Reply I replayed this part of the episode twice, and can confirm that the Doctor called for on the PA was Dr. Pulaski. :*I think it goes without saying that there are probably more than one Dr. Pulaski in the Star Trek universe and probably several in Starfleet. Unless the page gave her full name it's probably, at best, just a little homage the writers threw in. --Maestro4k 19:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC) Needs of the Many, Out Weigh The Needs of the Few Didn't I hear Tuvok say this quote also? --Shane 19:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC) :Never mind.. http://uk.geocities.com/chakoteya/S7/722.htm --Shane 05:48, 18 July 2006 (UTC) Death of the Borg Queen I think the Queen has died four times (or at least her body has been destroyed) that we know of. The first time was at the end of "The Best of Both Worlds" (supported by Picard's line in "Star trek: First Contact"), then again at the end of First Contact (when she disolved). She also was killed at the end of "Dark Frontier" when the Borg Diamond she was in was destroyed when Voyager imploded the transwarp Conduit for a light year, and then again in this episode, "Endgame". The only way to avoid this is to say that the queen didn't really die because her conscious is separate from the body - but then this would mean that she has never died at all! I don't think it's justifiable to say that she only died when we actually saw her die - after all, the only time we actually saw her dead body was at the end of First Contact. And this logic would mean that no characters die unless we actaully see them dead (such as Fred Durst), and I don't see how holding this standard for the Borg Queen but not for other characters can be held. If no one objects, I'll adjust the background info for this episode to reflect this.--Tiberius 03:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC) Reunion setting Inside a hotel, the ten year reunion is taking place. That's not a hotel. It's Admiral Janeway's apartment, the same one to which Dr. Joe pays her a visit later and the one in which she's watching TV in the teaser. Grandfather paradox There's a major "grandfather paradox" problem with this episode. By changing the past, Admiral Janeway was effectively erasing or overwriting her own timeline, such that the individual she was, with all her experiences and motivations, would not exist in 2404. Thus, whatever Kathryn Janeway exists in 2404 would have no motivation, let alone any need, to travel into the past to change Voyager's future. I have seen similar "plot discrepancies" discussed in other episode articles; shouldn't this be mentioned here? As a side note, suppose Admiral Janeway's plan had worked the way she anticipated, that she went into the past and guided Voyager through the transwarp hub into the Alpha Quadrant. What was then supposed to become of her? Was she going to live out the rest of her life in her past/Captain Janeway's present? :The time travel reverses causality, effects can "cause" the cause, and observed before the cause. (cf. VOY: Parallax) On a side note, the grandfather paradox doesn't really stand up, if someone has the ability to time travel (eg, 1985 to 1885) then, all they have to do is displace an equal mass from the 1985 with that of 1885, and once the person is back in 1885, everything will follow the laws of physics like normal (ie, putting a bullet in your grandfather will kill him), afterall a person doesn't have to be born to exist, killing your grandfather have no effect on the particles that make up you. Time travelling to the past (causality is reversed, the effect "precedes" the cause, although there really isn't an absolute direction for which precedes which in the timeline now given that this kind of time travel is possible.) --72.75.51.62 21:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC) Tea thermos The tea thermos Reg hands to Admiral Janeway before her departure bears a striking resemblance to the container of warp plasma Torres gave to the Automated Unit in "Prototype". Can anyone verify this? --Skyler 20:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC) :Yep, they are identical, only difference is the colour of the metal. The warp plasma container was golden, the tea thermos is blue, but the same prop was used. --Jörg 11:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC) ::Wow, that must be powerful tea! ;-) --Skyler 16:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC) Production # Clarification Shouldn't the production number for the feature-length version of this episode be listed as "828" (as given in the Voyager DVDs)? Holes in Summary There is a rather sizeable chunk of missing information between Janeway hatching a plot with Barclay and stealing the chrono deflector. Was this done on purpose? Was it because the flashbacks and flashforwards made it difficult to summarize? There is no mention of Tuvok's illness and other character changes during these scenes. -Topher208 03:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC) Date Redux? Some anon changed the date of this , , and this episode to "21 November 2377", "13 November 2377", and "21 December 2377" respectively from "2378". They had previously edited the BG notes of to add: :However, this appears to be a continuity error, as the stardate of 54868.6 roughly corresponds to November 13, 2377, and all other stardates in this season begin with the digits "54", corresponding to the year 2377. What's the justification from this exact stardate to date correlation? -- Sulfur 08:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC) :There is none - the idea that a "stardate-delta" of 1000 equals exactly one year is speculation, and the idea that stardate XX000 corresponds to January 1st in the human calendar even more. :) -- Cid Highwind 09:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC) ::As I said on the Homestead talk page, I don't think the anon user checked the talk page there and saw the link to the forum discussion about the year. I agree with the results of that discussion — since Neelix's comment places in 2378 then it's 2378 from there to the end of the season. I'm all for changing their edits back. --Maestro4k 12:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC) Transwarp plothole? As I'm sure has been noted by many of the great minds here at Memory Alpha, the convenient exit point of an established Borg transwarp conduit less than a lightyear from Earth is a bit of a plot contrivance. -If it had been there for any length of time, why didn't the Borg throw a fleet at our planet? (Do they prefer to send lone Cubes on the "Scenic Route" through the Neutral Zone?) -And if (as you may argue) it was a recent addition to the Borg's galactic roadmap, in preparation for an imminent attack on such a scale, wouldn't that attack have occurred (to devestating effect) by 2404? Just one of the many examples of lazy writing on the part of Berman & Braga on this episode (need I mention Transphasic torpedoes, or the absence of the Century26 Temporal Watchdog Committee?). Also worthy of note was the colouring of the Transwarp conduits - they looked exactly like a Quantum Slipstream Eddie. -- Destructor 20:47, 15 April 2007 (GMT) : Nitpicks don't belong on episode pages (thanks for leaving it out of the article), and this isn't a place for episode discussion. Discussion pages such as this one are for discussing what should or shouldn't be on the page. If you have a legitimate question, please ask at the Reference desk, otherwise it is more appropriate for a Star Trek discussion board.--Tim Thomason 21:06, 15 April 2007 (UTC) : Of those the only thing with any real validity is the transwarp conduit color (and that was likely a production error), the others can be explained with in-universe explanations. (For example, the future Star Fleet time-line folks didn't get involved because this was supposed to happen in the correct time-line, the same way the time incursions in previous series were.) --Maestro4k 20:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC) "Warning, regeneration cycle incomplete." The article says that the computer normally doesn't say Warning. However, in Child's Play the computer says it twice. Once when Mezoti can not sleep due to Icheb leaving and again when Seven of Nine is awoken by Mezoti. 74.229.215.99 12:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC) Significance of Stardate What is the significance of the Stardate that Tuvok keeps repeating (53317)? Perhaps some explanation could be given in the trivia section? Thanks! --72.75.51.62 20:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC) :This is the dialogue from the episode that referes to that stardate: :EMH: Stardate 53317. If my memory files are accurate, that was the day Captain Janeway was abducted by the Kellidians. Is that who you're talking about, Tuvok? Captain Janeway? :TUVOK: Her disappearance remains a mystery. :EMH: No, you solved that mystery, Tuvok. You rescued the Captain and brought her back to Voyager safe and sound. Remember? :Apart from that, we know nothing. --Jörg 20:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC) Endgame Phaser ??? Hi, in some shops, so called Endgame Phasers are being offered for sale. Perhaps I'm just blind, but where the heck does such a phaser appear in Endgame? Thanks!– Cmdr. Wernersson 10:36, 29 July 2007 (UTC)